C12 - Business Law Case Analysis 2

George Vernon Hansen served as a representative for the second Congressional District of Idaho during the years 1965 and 1969 and then again from 1975, right up to his conviction in 1984. Hansen was convicted of violating 18 U.S.C § 1001 by way of submitting false statements concerning matters within the jurisdiction of a division inside the United States. Hansen’s conviction was due to his failure to disclose a $50,000 loan from 1978 ,which he gave to his spouse, on his EIGA forms which was co-signed by Nelson Bunker Hunt. Hansen also omitted a $84,475 profit made from silver commodities which was made during 1979, a loan just over $61,000 received from Nelson Baker Hunt during 1980 along with $135,000 in total for a collection of loans received from private individuals during 1981. Hansen contested how the facts of the case applied under section 18 U.S.C. § 1001 and moved to dismiss the charge however the court denied this motion. Hansen tried to appeal however the court established that the all counts from the conviction of 1984 was to be upheld. Hansen also filed a motion to receive another trial as well as other relief to which the court denied. Hansen served 1 year in the federal prison facility and was instructed to pay a total of $40,000 for the four fines incurred. During a jury trial in the United States District Court for the District of Ohio on March 12th, 1992, Hansen was convicted of a total of forty-five counts of bank fraud. Seven days later, Judge Edward Lodge sentenced Hansen to serve forty-eight months in prison while he was still in federal custody. This made the sentence a total length of three years for Hansen. Because of another trial of similar nature being overruled in 1995, Hansen filed a motion for the court to This study source was downloaded by from CourseH on :03:06 GMT -05:00 United States v. Hansen 2 relinquish both his conviction from 1984 as well as his prison sentence. He also moved to have the monies used to pay the $40,000 fines to be returned in full with added interest as well as using the time he has already spent in jail to reduce the prison sentence imposed from the 1992 conviction. Identify the parties and explain each party’s position The petitioner, George Vernon Hansen filed a petition against the United States Supreme Court. Hansen applied for relief for his convictions and a refund for fines paid and the court stated that the petitioner can only contest the sentence in terms of time which was served while in custody and the request for relief was denied under the federal habeas corpus statute, 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Outline the case’s procedural history including any appeals Hansen first appeared at the United States District Court, District of Columbia for his 1984 conviction and was sentenced. Hansen also appeared again in this same court in 1992 where he was convicted again on different charges. In 1995, Hansen requested an appeal with the United States Supreme Court. What is the legal issue in question in this case? The legal issue in question in this case is should the court dismiss Hansen of his charges and yield to his relief due to the fact that the same charges were brought under United States v. Bramblett and the case was overruled and they both violated the same section 18 U.S.C. § 1001. This study source was downloaded by from CourseH on :03:06 GMT -05:00 United States v. Hansen 3 How did the court rule on the legal issue of this case?